Evaluating surveillance definitions of HIV viral suppression 2015–2019: Which definition best detected barriers to care?

Background: People living with HIV (PLWH) who have not achieved or maintained viral suppression post-diagnosis likely face multiple barriers to HIV care. To identify these barriers a universally accepted definition of viral suppression is needed. The most common definition, the Center for Disease Co...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of public health research 2023-04, Vol.12 (2), p.22799036231182031
Hauptverfasser: Erly, Steven, Campos, Leticia, Buskin, Susan, Reuer, Jennifer
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 2
container_start_page 22799036231182031
container_title Journal of public health research
container_volume 12
creator Erly, Steven
Campos, Leticia
Buskin, Susan
Reuer, Jennifer
description Background: People living with HIV (PLWH) who have not achieved or maintained viral suppression post-diagnosis likely face multiple barriers to HIV care. To identify these barriers a universally accepted definition of viral suppression is needed. The most common definition, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definition, contains simplifying assumptions that may misclassify individuals and attenuate associations. In this study, we evaluated alternative definitions of viral suppression on their ability to identify barriers to care. Design and methods: We used HIV surveillance data to classify participants of the 2015–2019 Washington Medical Monitoring Project (MMP) as virally suppressed or not using the CDC definition and two definitions that assess viral suppression over a longer period (“Enriched” and “Durable”). We identified barriers to suppression from literature (unstable housing, illicit drug use, poor mental health, heavy drinking, recent incarceration, racism, and poverty) and measured them using interview questions from MMP. We compared the rate ratios (RR) of being not virally suppressed using each definition for each barrier. Results: There were 858 PLWH in our study. All viral suppression definitions classified a similar proportion of people as suppressed (85%–89%). The durable viral suppression definition consistently yielded the largest rate ratios (e.g. unstable housing: CDC RR = 1.3, 95% CI 0.9–1.8; Enriched 1.5, 95% CI 1.0–2.2; Durable 2.2, 95% CI 1.6–3.1) and reclassified 10% of the population relative to the CDC definition. Conclusions: Longitudinal definitions for viral suppression may yield less misclassification and serve as superior tools for identifying and curtailing barriers to HIV care.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/22799036231182031
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>sage_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10285601</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_22799036231182031</sage_id><sourcerecordid>10.1177_22799036231182031</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c391t-ccdd693dd6a7e05a6470bb69c7b274a59e5efd3b554011fa5167fa05ca40a1903</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9Uc1KAzEQDqJYqT6AF8kLVDNJk7heiojaguDFn-Mym51tI-tuSbYFPfkOvqFPYkpVKoI5zGRmvu8L-YaxQxDHANaeSGmzTCgjFcCpFAq22N6qN1g1tzfuPXYQ45NIx0irZLbLesoqA1KZPfZ6ucR6gZ1vpjwuwpJ8XWPjiJdU-cZ3vm0ibys-njzwpQ9YJ9R8HijGNOFSgP54e08pO-OPM-9mGzxeUOxS3ZHrqOQFhuApRN613GGg0T7bqbCOdPCV--z-6vLuYjy4ub2eXJzfDJzKoBs4V5YmUymgJaHRDK0oCpM5W0g7RJ2RpqpUhdZDAVChBmMrFNrhUCAkA_pstNadL4pnKh01XfpHPg_-GcNL3qLPf08aP8un7TIHIU-1EZAUYK3gQhtjoOqHDCJfLSP_s4zEOdp89YfxbX0CHK8BEaeUP7WL0CQX_lH8BMemlGQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluating surveillance definitions of HIV viral suppression 2015–2019: Which definition best detected barriers to care?</title><source>SAGE Journals Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><creator>Erly, Steven ; Campos, Leticia ; Buskin, Susan ; Reuer, Jennifer</creator><creatorcontrib>Erly, Steven ; Campos, Leticia ; Buskin, Susan ; Reuer, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><description>Background: People living with HIV (PLWH) who have not achieved or maintained viral suppression post-diagnosis likely face multiple barriers to HIV care. To identify these barriers a universally accepted definition of viral suppression is needed. The most common definition, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definition, contains simplifying assumptions that may misclassify individuals and attenuate associations. In this study, we evaluated alternative definitions of viral suppression on their ability to identify barriers to care. Design and methods: We used HIV surveillance data to classify participants of the 2015–2019 Washington Medical Monitoring Project (MMP) as virally suppressed or not using the CDC definition and two definitions that assess viral suppression over a longer period (“Enriched” and “Durable”). We identified barriers to suppression from literature (unstable housing, illicit drug use, poor mental health, heavy drinking, recent incarceration, racism, and poverty) and measured them using interview questions from MMP. We compared the rate ratios (RR) of being not virally suppressed using each definition for each barrier. Results: There were 858 PLWH in our study. All viral suppression definitions classified a similar proportion of people as suppressed (85%–89%). The durable viral suppression definition consistently yielded the largest rate ratios (e.g. unstable housing: CDC RR = 1.3, 95% CI 0.9–1.8; Enriched 1.5, 95% CI 1.0–2.2; Durable 2.2, 95% CI 1.6–3.1) and reclassified 10% of the population relative to the CDC definition. Conclusions: Longitudinal definitions for viral suppression may yield less misclassification and serve as superior tools for identifying and curtailing barriers to HIV care.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2279-9036</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2279-9028</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2279-9036</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/22799036231182031</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37361236</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><ispartof>Journal of public health research, 2023-04, Vol.12 (2), p.22799036231182031</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2023.</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2023 2023 SAGE Publications Ltd unless otherwise noted. Manuscript content on this site is licensed under Creative Commons Licenses.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c391t-ccdd693dd6a7e05a6470bb69c7b274a59e5efd3b554011fa5167fa05ca40a1903</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5477-9660</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10285601/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10285601/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,21945,27830,27901,27902,44921,45309,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37361236$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Erly, Steven</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campos, Leticia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buskin, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reuer, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluating surveillance definitions of HIV viral suppression 2015–2019: Which definition best detected barriers to care?</title><title>Journal of public health research</title><addtitle>J Public Health Res</addtitle><description>Background: People living with HIV (PLWH) who have not achieved or maintained viral suppression post-diagnosis likely face multiple barriers to HIV care. To identify these barriers a universally accepted definition of viral suppression is needed. The most common definition, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definition, contains simplifying assumptions that may misclassify individuals and attenuate associations. In this study, we evaluated alternative definitions of viral suppression on their ability to identify barriers to care. Design and methods: We used HIV surveillance data to classify participants of the 2015–2019 Washington Medical Monitoring Project (MMP) as virally suppressed or not using the CDC definition and two definitions that assess viral suppression over a longer period (“Enriched” and “Durable”). We identified barriers to suppression from literature (unstable housing, illicit drug use, poor mental health, heavy drinking, recent incarceration, racism, and poverty) and measured them using interview questions from MMP. We compared the rate ratios (RR) of being not virally suppressed using each definition for each barrier. Results: There were 858 PLWH in our study. All viral suppression definitions classified a similar proportion of people as suppressed (85%–89%). The durable viral suppression definition consistently yielded the largest rate ratios (e.g. unstable housing: CDC RR = 1.3, 95% CI 0.9–1.8; Enriched 1.5, 95% CI 1.0–2.2; Durable 2.2, 95% CI 1.6–3.1) and reclassified 10% of the population relative to the CDC definition. Conclusions: Longitudinal definitions for viral suppression may yield less misclassification and serve as superior tools for identifying and curtailing barriers to HIV care.</description><issn>2279-9036</issn><issn>2279-9028</issn><issn>2279-9036</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFRWT</sourceid><recordid>eNp9Uc1KAzEQDqJYqT6AF8kLVDNJk7heiojaguDFn-Mym51tI-tuSbYFPfkOvqFPYkpVKoI5zGRmvu8L-YaxQxDHANaeSGmzTCgjFcCpFAq22N6qN1g1tzfuPXYQ45NIx0irZLbLesoqA1KZPfZ6ucR6gZ1vpjwuwpJ8XWPjiJdU-cZ3vm0ibys-njzwpQ9YJ9R8HijGNOFSgP54e08pO-OPM-9mGzxeUOxS3ZHrqOQFhuApRN613GGg0T7bqbCOdPCV--z-6vLuYjy4ub2eXJzfDJzKoBs4V5YmUymgJaHRDK0oCpM5W0g7RJ2RpqpUhdZDAVChBmMrFNrhUCAkA_pstNadL4pnKh01XfpHPg_-GcNL3qLPf08aP8un7TIHIU-1EZAUYK3gQhtjoOqHDCJfLSP_s4zEOdp89YfxbX0CHK8BEaeUP7WL0CQX_lH8BMemlGQ</recordid><startdate>20230401</startdate><enddate>20230401</enddate><creator>Erly, Steven</creator><creator>Campos, Leticia</creator><creator>Buskin, Susan</creator><creator>Reuer, Jennifer</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>AFRWT</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5477-9660</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230401</creationdate><title>Evaluating surveillance definitions of HIV viral suppression 2015–2019: Which definition best detected barriers to care?</title><author>Erly, Steven ; Campos, Leticia ; Buskin, Susan ; Reuer, Jennifer</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c391t-ccdd693dd6a7e05a6470bb69c7b274a59e5efd3b554011fa5167fa05ca40a1903</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Erly, Steven</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campos, Leticia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buskin, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reuer, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><collection>SAGE Journals Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of public health research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Erly, Steven</au><au>Campos, Leticia</au><au>Buskin, Susan</au><au>Reuer, Jennifer</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluating surveillance definitions of HIV viral suppression 2015–2019: Which definition best detected barriers to care?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of public health research</jtitle><addtitle>J Public Health Res</addtitle><date>2023-04-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>22799036231182031</spage><pages>22799036231182031-</pages><issn>2279-9036</issn><issn>2279-9028</issn><eissn>2279-9036</eissn><abstract>Background: People living with HIV (PLWH) who have not achieved or maintained viral suppression post-diagnosis likely face multiple barriers to HIV care. To identify these barriers a universally accepted definition of viral suppression is needed. The most common definition, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definition, contains simplifying assumptions that may misclassify individuals and attenuate associations. In this study, we evaluated alternative definitions of viral suppression on their ability to identify barriers to care. Design and methods: We used HIV surveillance data to classify participants of the 2015–2019 Washington Medical Monitoring Project (MMP) as virally suppressed or not using the CDC definition and two definitions that assess viral suppression over a longer period (“Enriched” and “Durable”). We identified barriers to suppression from literature (unstable housing, illicit drug use, poor mental health, heavy drinking, recent incarceration, racism, and poverty) and measured them using interview questions from MMP. We compared the rate ratios (RR) of being not virally suppressed using each definition for each barrier. Results: There were 858 PLWH in our study. All viral suppression definitions classified a similar proportion of people as suppressed (85%–89%). The durable viral suppression definition consistently yielded the largest rate ratios (e.g. unstable housing: CDC RR = 1.3, 95% CI 0.9–1.8; Enriched 1.5, 95% CI 1.0–2.2; Durable 2.2, 95% CI 1.6–3.1) and reclassified 10% of the population relative to the CDC definition. Conclusions: Longitudinal definitions for viral suppression may yield less misclassification and serve as superior tools for identifying and curtailing barriers to HIV care.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>37361236</pmid><doi>10.1177/22799036231182031</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5477-9660</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2279-9036
ispartof Journal of public health research, 2023-04, Vol.12 (2), p.22799036231182031
issn 2279-9036
2279-9028
2279-9036
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10285601
source SAGE Journals Open Access; PubMed Central; EZB Electronic Journals Library; PubMed Central Open Access
title Evaluating surveillance definitions of HIV viral suppression 2015–2019: Which definition best detected barriers to care?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T07%3A11%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-sage_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluating%20surveillance%20definitions%20of%20HIV%20viral%20suppression%202015%E2%80%932019:%20Which%20definition%20best%20detected%20barriers%20to%20care?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20public%20health%20research&rft.au=Erly,%20Steven&rft.date=2023-04-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=22799036231182031&rft.pages=22799036231182031-&rft.issn=2279-9036&rft.eissn=2279-9036&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/22799036231182031&rft_dat=%3Csage_pubme%3E10.1177_22799036231182031%3C/sage_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/37361236&rft_sage_id=10.1177_22799036231182031&rfr_iscdi=true